Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Findings of Fact re: Witness Testimony, Candidness with the Court and Deceptive or Misleading Evidence

HH162-12 : SALIM ABDUL KARIM NOOR MOHAMED vs THE STATE
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA J and HUNGWE J

The risk of false incrimination in this case was not safely excluded...,. When asked why he took such a long time to report the theft to the police his explanation was that he attempted to resolve the matter at the family level. This may be so, but the inference that the report was actuated ...
More

HH153-09 : THE STATE vs IGNATIAS BOTERERE
Ruled By: BERE J and ASSESSORS: MAGOROKOSITO and RAJA

Throughout the evidence of the first two State witnesses, we remained cognisant of the need to exercise caution given the fact that these witnesses came from the same village with the deceased, hence the possibility of relying on deceptive evidence could not be ruled out.
More

HH153-09 : THE STATE vs IGNATIAS BOTERERE
Ruled By: BERE J and ASSESSORS: MAGOROKOSITO and RAJA

Our view is that it is extremely difficult to find fault in that testimony. It was evidence well-given, and so given in an objective and unbiased manner, despite the fact that the first two witnesses came from the same village with the deceased. Theirs was a fair summary of what transpired.
More

HH153-09 : THE STATE vs IGNATIAS BOTERERE
Ruled By: BERE J and ASSESSORS: MAGOROKOSITO and RAJA

We have not allowed ourselves to be held hostage by the irrational denials of the accused whose evidence was far from convincing. The accused was determined to deny everything that was put to him by the State counsel, including even conceding that he was aware of the altercation between the conductors and the deceased over the ...
More

HB35-09 : WONDER MOYO vs THE STATE
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

The applicant also seeks to rely on a letter from one Casper Nkomo exonerating him. This letter is clearly intended to mislead when regard is had to what the applicant himself had to say. His reasons for stealing the cattle are quite clear. Casper Nkomo's explanation is, therefore, too clumsy to mislead anybody. It is simply ...
More

HB104-09 : THE STATE vs GIFT CHIKWEYA
Ruled By: CHEDA J

The defence counsel found himself in a difficult position in cross-examining Regis Chitambira as he was very steadfast in his evidence. For that reason, we have no alternative but to conclude that he was a credible witness, and, as such, his evidence is accepted in its entirety.
More

HB105-09 : THE STATE vs LEO MATIBE
Ruled By: CHEDA J

Leonard Dube was confident and was not shaken under cross-examination. He impressed the court as an honest witness, and, as such, we have no reason to doubt his credibility, and we therefore accept his evidence as a true reflection of what happened on this fateful day.
More

HB105-09 : THE STATE vs LEO MATIBE
Ruled By: CHEDA J

We find that the accused was not a truthful witness. The evidence which he led in court in trying to defend himself from the commission of the offence is hollow, and is rejected...,.
More

HB118-09 : THE STATE vs THULISANI NKALA
Ruled By: CHEDA J

Stephen Sikhosana gave his evidence in a well-balanced manner. He did not seek to exaggerate at all. We find that he was an honest witness, and, as such, we accept his evidence without much ado.
More

HB118-09 : THE STATE vs THULISANI NKALA
Ruled By: CHEDA J

We also find that Andrew Siziba gave his evidence very well and in a satisfactory manner, and, for that reason, we accept it.
More

HB118-09 : THE STATE vs THULISANI NKALA
Ruled By: CHEDA J

Thabani Ncube, in our observation, was an honest and truthful witness. We have no reason to disbelieve him, and his evidence is accepted in its entirety.
More

HB118-09 : THE STATE vs THULISANI NKALA
Ruled By: CHEDA J

We find that the accused was a very evasive witness and untruthful. He told the court that in Count One he remembers all what happened but chose not to remember how he stabbed Abel Ncube, John Moyo, and Plaxedes Ndlovu. Again, in Count Two, although he had been drinking, he remembers some incidents and not others. What is interesting ...
More

HH66-10 : THE STATE vs BENJAMIN NEVER
Ruled By: KUDYA J and ASSESSORS: TUTANI and MUTAMBIRA

The discrepancies in the testimony of Maxmor Mukubvu on what he saw the accused doing demonstrated his unreliability as a witness. It seems to me that as they were hunting in the dark it was difficult for him to clearly observe the actions of the accused in relation to the deceased. His version was ...
More

HH79-10 : THE STATE vs ROY LESLIE BENNET
Ruled By: BHUNU J and ASSESSORS: MUSENGEZI

Needless to say that Mr. Mutsetse was an appalling witness. He was argumentative and arrogant in the witness stand. When he could not stand the heat he asked to be excused saying that he had some business to attend in Mozambique. The court refused to let him off the hook pointing out that every other ...
More

HH94-10 : THE STATE vs NIVEO PRANDINI
Ruled By: KUDYA J and CHITAKUNYE J

The trial magistrate correctly found that the complainant and Kudakwashe Mavhunga, who alleged that he was two metres away from the protagonists at the back of the shop, were not credible witnesses in regards to the pushing and head-butting. His finding cannot be faulted if regard is had to the absence of any physical injuries on, ...
More

HH137-10 : THE STATE vs FARESI MANYOWA
Ruled By: HUNGWE J and ASSESSORS

It seems to us that the witnesses were all generally truthful in their evidence.
More

HH137-10 : THE STATE vs FARESI MANYOWA
Ruled By: HUNGWE J and ASSESSORS

It is the evidence put forward by the accused which, on some aspects, was clearly meant to mislead the court. Only the accused testified that the house was lit by an by an oil lamp. Her sister-in-law, the neighbour, and the Investigating Officer, all say there was electricity lighting inside the house. Clearly, she did not ...
More

HH130-10 : STATE vs NETSAI MAFUSIRE
Ruled By: MUSAKWA J and ASSESSORS

Maud Date was not a very forthcoming witness. She gave the impression that she did not know what was going on between the accused and the deceased. The little she did was to confirm that the two's relationship was rocky. For example, she told the court that she once heard from the accused that he ...
More

HH207-10 : STATE vs SIMON SAME MURUJU and LOAN BEANS
Ruled By: KUDYA J and ASSESSORS: TUTANI and MUTAMBIRA

The two police detectives contradicted each other in regards to whom between them read out the recorded statement to the accused and on the length of time it took them to record the statement.
More

HH207-10 : STATE vs SIMON SAME MURUJU and LOAN BEANS
Ruled By: KUDYA J and ASSESSORS: TUTANI and MUTAMBIRA

The accused alleged that the police informer Angirai Soundo showed him the house with an avocado tree where he sold the cellphone. This house was along the route they often used to go to the market to sell their wares. He led the police to that house after they failed to locate Angirai Soundo ...
More

HB18-10 : RAMSON MASHONGA vs THE STATE
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J and CHEDA J

Inspector Charles Bendembe was a fair witness. His evidence was not challenged at all. The appellant declined to ask him any questions. The appellant was not being truthful when he suggested that he had assigned the complainant to other duties in the charge office because after the assault she made a formal report in the ...
More

HB52-10 : THE STATE vs TICHAFARA SITHOLE
Ruled By: CHEDA J

We find that John Mwanja gave his evidence very well to such an extent that he captured all the events of the day except the shooting. For that reason we accept his testimony in its entirety. We find that Junior Bakali was credible. Although it was her husband who was killed by the accused, she ...
More

View Appeal HH29-11 : STATE vs BIGKNOWS WAIROSI
Ruled By: UCHENA J and ASSESSORS: BARWE and GONZO

Eneresi Siamkonde gave her evidence convincingly. She said though the accused is her son she had to tell the court what she knew. There is no known bad blood between the accused and his mother. There is nothing in her evidence to suggest a motive to lie. The accused, in his evidence, does not ...
More

View Appeal HH29-11 : STATE vs BIGKNOWS WAIROSI
Ruled By: UCHENA J and ASSESSORS: BARWE and GONZO

A witness's credibility cannot be affected by his not mentioning something if he was not asked about it or if he has anything else to say relevant to the case. In a trial where a lot is involved, as was the case in this case, the prosecutor should have taken the witness through what was ...
More

View Appeal HH29-11 : STATE vs BIGKNOWS WAIROSI
Ruled By: UCHENA J and ASSESSORS: BARWE and GONZO

Detective Sgt Nhari also attempted to mislead the court when he said they kept the accused at their CID offices after he had confessed because they wanted to take his finger prints. When counsel for the accused put it to him that fingerprints are taken before an accused is interviewed he agreed that that is ...
More

HH331-13 : ITAI MOTSI vs THE STATE
Ruled By: MUSAKWA J

The trial court highlighted a number of unsatisfactory features in respect of the testimony of several of the Sate witnesses. For example, the complainant's statement regarding the accused persons stated that he knew them by name. This was despite the fact that the statement was recorded before the applicant and co-accused had been arrested. ...
More

HH149-11 : THE STATE vs SHADRECK ENZANISAI CHIRERE
Ruled By: UCHENA J and ASSESSORS

Tinashe Makaza gave his evidence confidently. He was forthright and did not colour his evidence to favour the deceased. He, in our view, told the court what happened. He said it was the deceased who started the fight. He described how the deceased viciously assaulted the accused while holding the hand which had the ...
More

View Appeal HB08-13 : THE STATE vs NKANYEZI MOYO
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Sikwamula Filias Moyo gave his evidence in detail and in a clear fashion. He was a credible witness who is worth to be believed. He suspected the accused as the culprit and his suspicion was supported by indications made by the accused pointing at different places where the accused had hidden items that were being worn ...
More

HB26-13 : THE STATE vs LUCIEL MOYO
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

Patience Makiwa gave her evidence well and is worth to be believed. She was credible and her evidence generally reads well….,.The accused's testimony is fraught with contradictions and inconsistencies. The accused was untruthful and his evidence cannot be believed. He is not a credible witness.
More

HB26-13 : THE STATE vs LUCIEL MOYO
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

Patience Makiwa gave her evidence well and is worth to be believed. She was credible and her evidence generally reads well….,.The accused's testimony is fraught with contradictions and inconsistencies. The accused was untruthful and his evidence cannot be believed. He is not a credible witness.
More

HB26-13 : THE STATE vs LUCIEL MOYO
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

Patience Makiwa gave her evidence well and is worth to be believed. She was credible and her evidence generally reads well….,.The accused's testimony is fraught with contradictions and inconsistencies. The accused was untruthful and his evidence cannot be believed. He is not a credible witness.
More

HB27-13 : THE STATE vs STARBOY MASAVE
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

We find the evidence of Bernard Siamtenge to be fair and credible. There were no indications of any exaggeration in any respects and there were no material contradictions - even under cross examination.
More

View Appeal HB31-13 : THE STATE vs EZRA MANENJI and SIMON TONGOONA
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

We found the evidence of Joshua Matsanza to be clear and straight forward. The evidence reads well. The evidence of this witness was not controverted in material respects under cross-examination. This witness impressed us as an honest witness whose eye-witness account is credible….,.We find the evidence of Tendai Machokoto to be clear or and to ...
More

HB74-11 : THE STATE vs BUTHOLEZWE TSHUMA and WELCOME NCUBE and NOMORE PHIRI and GEE MOYO alias YENZANI MOYO alias GERALD TSHUMA
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Sithandekile Nkomo was a truthful witness who was worth to be believed. Her evidence was corroborated on all material points by other witnesses who testified for the State….,. Detective Assistant Inspector Albert Zhou gave his evidence well and is worth to be believed. He was not shaken under cross examination. The court finds that all the ...
More

HB77-13 : THE STATE vs KUDAKWASHE MASHAVAKURE
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

The evidence of Jacqueline Msebele was corroborated in all material respects. It was clear and she was worth to be believed….,. Fiona Mpofu testified well and is worth to be believed….,. All the State witnesses testified well and truthfully. Their testimony is accepted by this court.
More

HB182-13 : THE STATE vs CONRAD SIBANDA and FANUEL NOTSA DUBE and QUIET SIBANDA and MPILOKAMLIMU NCUBE
Ruled By: BERE J

We have had the privilege of seeing Sikhumbuzo Mpala testify here in court. His testimony did exhibit numerous cracks as outlined. Naturally, the witness was devastated by the manner in which his nephew's life was cut short. It was a callous assault. But beyond all the criticisms that could be laid against this witness, we are ...
More

View Appeal HB104-11 : THE STATE vs NORMAN SIBANDA
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

All the State witnesses gave their evidence well and clearly. They were worth to be believed. Wherever their evidence conflicts with that of the accused I prefer theirs to that of the accused. The accused was an unreliable witness who changed his story on a number of occasions. For instance, he did not mention in ...
More

HB141-11 : THE STATE vs FARAI MACHAYA and ABEL MAPHOSA and EDMORE GANA and BOTHWELL GANA and OBERT GAVI and TIRIVASHOMA MAWADZE
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

In our view, Tinashe Kwicho gave his evidence extremely well. Although subjected to exhausting cross-examination, which was repetitive, his story remained the same. Although he could not identify the assailants in the night, he gave a good and clear account of how the deceased was assaulted by the people who had abducted him at ...
More

HB143-11 : THE STATE vs MTHABISI KHUMALO
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Shadreck Sibanda gave his evidence clearly and in a straight forward manner. He was worth to be believed. The same cannot be said about the accused who was clearly untruthful. He had been so right from the beginning. For instance, he lied in his statement that he had been given the knife with which he stabbed ...
More

HB150-11 : THE STATE vs SIMANGA LETHA
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

The evidence of the State was presented very well and other than the contradiction around the two jackets, we have no reason not to accept it.
More

View Appeal HB162-11 : THE STATE vs VUSUMUZI MOYO and KHULEKANI DUMISANI NKOMO
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

The two State witnesses gave their evidence very well. They did not try to exaggerate anything, their demeanour was excellent and they gave a user friendly factual account of what they witnessed. We have no reason whatsoever to fault their evidence, subject to the comments we will make regarding the identification parade involving Nkosilathi ...
More

HB165-11 : THE STATE vs PETERSON MAURICE ELDERMAN
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Thandiwe Sibanda was fair, and did not want to exaggerate things. She told this court that she and the accused reconciled after the death of the child and have since had two children together aged 3 years and 9 months respectively. She had nothing against the accused. She was a credible witness who is worth ...
More

HB178-11 : THE STATE vs MABUTHO MTAMBO and LANGELIHLE MOYO and PHIKISANI NDLOVU
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

Abednego Moyo gave his evidence very well, his demeanor was perfect, he was confident and his testimony was very clear. His delivery also had an air of dignity and he was not shaken at all under cross-examination. He did not attempt to exaggerate anything as shown by his readiness to concede that the switches ...
More

HH316-14 : THE STATE vs ZVENYIKA BASERA
Ruled By: BERE J

Chenekayi Muyambo, who gave evidence as the third State witness, did not entirely impress the court, particularly her denial of the knowledge of the two men, Maseure and Peace. As a court, we are unanimous that she deliberately misled the court by pretending not to know these two villagers who were known virtually by all ...
More

HH320-14 : THE STATE vs KUDAKWASHE MUSHANDIRA
Ruled By: BERE J and ASSESSORS: GWERU and MUTOMBA

Jacob Rutanha, the third State witness, was visibly very uneasy when he entered the witness box. This witness was obviously aware that he was the man at the centre of the deceased's death. There were aspects of his evidence which did not impress us. The witness's professed lack of knowledge of the accused person prior to ...
More

HB18-14 : THE STATE vs JECONIA MOYO
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Dorcas Ncube was a fair witness who gave her evidence clearly, convincingly and in a straight forward manner. She is worth to be believed.
More

HB34-14 : THE STATE vs GOLDEN BAKO and ERISHA SIMANGO and AMIRI PHIRI
Ruled By: TAKUVA J

Charity Danira is a credible witness although her evidence lacks detail. Charity Danira did not exaggerate her evidence. (i) She admitted that she did not see who started the fight. (ii) She did not see the accused persons assaulting the deceased with booted feet. (iii) She did not see what went on outside the shop. Most of her evidence is ...
More

HMA02-17 : THE STATE vs NICHOLAS MUTENDERA
Ruled By: MAWADZE J and ASSESSORS: MUSHUKU and MUTOMBA

In our assessment, Simplicio Matsenga gave his evidence well. He is related to both the accused and the now deceased as a brother-in-law married to their aunt. No reason was suggested to him as to why he would mislead the court in his evidence or show bias towards either the accused or the now ...
More

HMA04-17 : THE STATE vs EDWARD MUCHINI
Ruled By: MAWADZE J and ASSESSORS: DHAURAMANZI and GWERU

In our assessment, Brenda Mandizvidza gave her evidence well. As already said, most of the facts in this case are common cause. What we find commendable about her is that she did not seek to exaggerate her evidence by placing herself at the scene where her husband was fatally attacked. She was honest enough to ...
More

HMA14-17 : THE STATE vs TAWANDA GONO and LEE SHUMBA
Ruled By: MAWADZE J and ASSESSORS: MUSHUKU and GWERU

The assessment we made of John Hunyani was that he was a confused witness who had no consistent story to tell the court. He appeared to be a confused, if not overzealous, witness who was unnecessarily dramatic. Despite saying he had refreshed his memory by reading his statement he nonetheless could not say ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories

Back to top